This paper is from Session 3F: Similarities and contrasts in teaching mathematical and statistical thinking

which comes under Topic 3: Learning to teach statistics

Other papers under session 3F ... 3F1: Chance and necessity: the languages of probability and mathematics 3F2: Mathematical logic and statistical or stochastical ways of thinking:...

(Thursday 15th, 11:00-12:30)

Exploration and induction versus confirmation and deduction

Presenter

• Kathryn Laskey (George Mason University, United States)

Co-author

• Laura Martignon (Ludwigsburg University of Education, Germany)

Abstract

Application of the scientific method involves two interacting kinds of reasoning: heuristic exploration and inference to arrive at hypotheses and deductive reasoning to confirm or refute them. Theoretical statistics draws on abstract mathematical reasoning, much of which lies beyond the capability of young students. Nevertheless, they can acquire a sophisticated understanding of statistical concepts by drawing on natural intuitions. There is an analogy in physics with its mathematical basis, which may be understood heuristically. In a similar way, many concepts in probability and statistics have physical analogues. Analogues such as the familiar ball and urn model connect to natural cognitive structures the brain has evolved to enable survival in a complex world. By drawing on these natural cognitive tools, teachers can have greater success both in developing intuitions and in facilitating the formation of abstract concepts.

Other papers under session 3F ... 3F1: Chance and necessity: the languages of probability and mathematics 3F2: Mathematical logic and statistical or stochastical ways of thinking:...